Remember that lawsuit that was filed by Harmony Gold back in July over Hasbro's SDCC 2013 Exclusive G.I. Joe/Transformers Crossover set Jetfire? The lawsuit sought to block further distribution of the set and monetary damages due to violation of their intellectual property. In short they felt the repainted/retooled Skystriker was a little too close to their Robotech Veritech fighter. Thanks to the folks over at Generals Joes we have an update on the case, which was dismissed with prejudice on September 23rd. It's likely that the two companies reached an out of court settlement, which resulted in the dismissal.

Sabrblade wrote:"Dismissed with prejudice"... not exactly a clear answer of who won and who lost, there.

Sounds like the courts took one look at the issue, rolled its eyes, and told both companies to simmer down, stop acting like children, and go about their business forgetting the issue ever happened.

I would be eternally overjoyed to see our legal system take such an approach with oh, say about 99% of the cases that came across a judges bench seeing as how that's how many are just complete and utter B.S.It was probably a case of Hasbro pulling out it's substantial wallet and asking Harmony Gold just how long they are really willing to play this game because Hasbro has the finances to drag it out for years without even breaking a sweat.

As for "Dismissed with prejudice"... It means that this lawsuit can never be entered again in court so, basically, Hasbro won this round without actually being granted full official licensing use. They can use the likeness of the Macross VF style jet (Jetfire) and there isn't a damn thing HG can say about it. Well, I suppose there IS but instead of taking them back to court over it all HG can do is run to the end of its chain and bark loudly.

-Judge-...and further more Harmony Gold and Hasbro, if you two don't learn to be nice and play nice this court will take away ALL your toys then you will have nothing to play with. Do you both understand?

Nemesis Destron wrote:-Judge-...and further more Harmony Gold and Hasbro, if you two don't learn to be nice and play nice this court will take away ALL your toys then you will have nothing to play with. Do you both understand?

I'm betting Harmony Gold was the group receiving the brunt of any judicial bitching. I mean, it's a silly case. Harmony Gold is known for being trouble with the courts.

I doubt there was any input from the court. Hasbro probably paid them off out of court and they agreed to dismiss their action. My job has me working with the court system and legal matters all the time, we do stuff like this all the time.

1) As stated by the OP (elDuque), this order was most likely entered by the parties involved, and NOT issued by the court (as stated plainly in the form, the court need not be involved for such a form to be filed). So no one necessarily "won" this battle, unless you call reduced legal fees a "win", in which case Hasbro won. But HG most likely received settlement money, or some other concession, so they could be said to have won as well.

2) The blatant disregard for intellectual property on this board (or anywhere else) is sadly unsurprising. Virtually none of you have ever owned an IP, and have had the joy of seeing someone profit off of your IP.

HG owns the rights to "Jetfire." Jetfire is a Robotech character with a different head; originally, Jetfire was literally borrowed from the Robotech toy line. Anything "Jetfire" should be okayed by the current owner, Harmony Gold, or it is (BY LAW) a violation of IP/copyright infringement.

3) Just because you love Hasbro and loathe HG does not make it right to blow off IP LAW. You can't judge someone guilty cause you hate them, or let someone go because you like them.

4) If you hate these kinds of "frivolous" lawsuits, it'd make more sense to talk about the U.S. Justice System and the out-of-control lawsuits that reward millions for ridiculous injuries/accidents. For example, there have been talks about putting monetary caps on lawsuits to eliminate this "lawsuit lottery" situation that's unique to the U.S.A. But Hasbro and HG's legal tussle is not the origin of wasted legal dollars and proceedings. The judges do not take your practical attitude and toss things out for being stupid.

Metrosuplex wrote:HG owns the rights to "Jetfire." Jetfire is a Robotech character with a different head; originally, Jetfire was literally borrowed from the Robotech toy line. Anything "Jetfire" should be okayed by the current owner, Harmony Gold, or it is (BY LAW) a violation of IP/copyright infringement.

Not quite true. Bandai and its licensee indeed own G1 Jetfire's design, the Macross Valkyrie (even if the jet mode should be considered public domain), but Hasbro owns the Jetfire character. If you put the Jetfire name and character in a new, legal body, Bandai has no right to claim IP infringement.

I may be overreading that quote a bit, but that's the kind of overreading the law system specialises in. Admittedly, the G1 Jetfire name is heavily connected to the Valkyrie design, and again, the SDCC toy was borderlining it with the new boosters. But you have to wonder: did the fact that Bandai licensed the Valkyrie to Hasbro back in 1985 play a role in the court's decision?

It's like a tug-o-war with Jetfire: if Bandai were to use red and black deco, Hasbro can sue. But if Hasbro used the Valkyrie design directly, Bandai can sue.

Well... obviously nobody read what I posted the first time around in regards to basic definition. Let me see if I can do a better overall job and make this picture a bit clearer...

This case, as it pertains to this particular toy, has been dismissed and is never to see the light of day in a court again. This much has been ordered BY THE COURTS!So yes, it made it to the bench, it was NOT settled out of court. NO PAYOFF!!Hasbro can use the image/likeness of Jetfire as he appears on this particular toy, that being a non-transforming, pre-existing toy to which they have chosen to apply paint apps. similar/identical to a design previously used by another company. This does NOT mean this is an overall "win" in their fight to use the original likeness/use of the Jetfire figure and I, for one, am glad it isn't because Hasbro DID blatantly steal the design for both Jetfire AND the original Roadbuster figures for use in their 1985 product line.(at least as far as American releases go. How much of this fight carries over to the original Takara line and how far back it goes, I don't know and could honestly care less.

T-Macksimus wrote:This does NOT mean this is an overall "win" in their fight to use the original likeness/use of the Jetfire figure and I, for one, am glad it isn't because Hasbro DID blatantly steal the design for both Jetfire AND the original Roadbuster figures for use in their 1985 product line.(at least as far as American releases go. How much of this fight carries over to the original Takara line and how far back it goes, I don't know and could honestly care less.

They were all licensed by Bandai. Unlike now, Bandai was no major player in the US market back then, so they had no qualms with licensing to Hasbro (and competitor Tonka for that matter). Jetfire just had happened to suffer the unpredicted import of the Macross anime as Robotech.but back in Japan, Bandai has always been a major competitor to Takara, so none of the Bandai toys were featured in the cartoon, or released in Japan as Transformers for that matter.

I think the only reason this happened was because Hasbro didn't clear it up with the IP owners first to get permission and pay any required licensing fees from the beginning. Hasbro and Takara have used this IP plenty of times in the past without issue, likely because they did seek permission first.

X: You're absolutely right about China, as their IP laws there are far more lax as I recall, but even if manufactured in China, if the item is distributed in the US or any other country where the IP laws are more strict, then the company behind it would face the same legal troubles (the company distributing it, not the manufacturer in China obviously). So yeah, if it were made in China and SDCC (where it is distributed/purchased) were in China, this lawsuit never would have happened. Go figure .

I still think that owners of intellectual property should be paid for their designs whenever used or unless they provide permission for its use free of charge, regardless of where, but it doesn't work that way. It's the same with bootleg music and movies. I think the owners should be paid for their work, but there are places where they aren't because there are no laws to protect their rights as IP/copyright owners. Oh well.

In the end there is one simple thing it boils down to: I really really want a reissue G1 Jetfire so I hope that Takara can and is willing to work out the rights to get it from Bandai somehow, although it's very unlikely. Maybe Hasbro can get the rights to do the reissue from Harmony Gold here in the US and from Bandai Japan if required as well. Again, it will probably never happen, but it sure would be sweet.

G1 Jetfire is actually a Macross toy from the Takatou line that was bought out by Bandai. G1 Jetfire is a hybrid of Hikaru Ichijyuo/Rick Hunter's VF-1S exactly to the "t". The head is the same as Roy Fokker's just replace the red stripe with yellow, and the red boosters dark navy blue.

Metrosuplex wrote:2) The blatant disregard for intellectual property on this board (or anywhere else) is sadly unsurprising. Virtually none of you have ever owned an IP, and have had the joy of seeing someone profit off of your IP.

HG owns the rights to "Jetfire." Jetfire is a Robotech character with a different head; originally, Jetfire was literally borrowed from the Robotech toy line. Anything "Jetfire" should be okayed by the current owner, Harmony Gold, or it is (BY LAW) a violation of IP/copyright infringement.

Actually 2 things here. Firstly HG doesn't own the IP rights to the Valkyrie. For a while there the Japanese rights were up in the air and as I understand it, Tatsunoko now own the rights to the Valkyrie design. Furthermore as I understand it, Tatsunoko has pulled them into line multiple times wit this sort of thing by telling them that in no uncertain terms, the only rights they have with the Macross designs are distribution rights.

bvzxa wrote:G1 Jetfire is actually a Macross toy from the Takatou line that was bought out by Bandai. G1 Jetfire is a hybrid of Hikaru Ichijyuo/Rick Hunter's VF-1S exactly to the "t". The head is the same as Roy Fokker's just replace the red stripe with yellow, and the red boosters dark navy blue.

Actually Jetfire from memory, is a discarded Strike Valkyrie prototype which Hasbro/Takara were allowed to use because there was a problem with the design's nosecone (can't remember if it was too long or too short).

bvzxa wrote:G1 Jetfire is actually a Macross toy from the Takatou line that was bought out by Bandai. G1 Jetfire is a hybrid of Hikaru Ichijyuo/Rick Hunter's VF-1S exactly to the "t". The head is the same as Roy Fokker's just replace the red stripe with yellow, and the red boosters dark navy blue.

Actually Jetfire from memory, is a discarded Strike Valkyrie prototype which Hasbro/Takara were allowed to use because there was a problem with the design's nosecone (can't remember if it was too long or too short).

No it is not a discarded prototype. It is the same Valkyrie from the Takatou line. The early 1985 releases even have the UN Spacey symbol on it. This is the Super Valkyrie from the Macross TV series using what is called a Super Fast pack. The Strike Valkyries are used in "Macross: Do you Remember Love" use what is called a Strike pack. When Bandai bought the rights from Takatou Takara/Hasbro also had the rights to the mold as well. In the U.S. Hasbro was able to release the Valkyrie as Jetfire here while Takara could not because of Bandai. This is why there is no release of Jetfire as a Transformer in Japan and there probably never will be.